Narrative:

I was working the sparta sector; northeast area of ZAU. The grand rapids approach control and tower close at midnight. ZAU has responsibility for the grand rapids airport. A NOTAM was issued at some point during the night that announced that both runways 8R/26L and 35/17 were closed. This I assume is for snow removal; but the NOTAM does not specify the reason for the closure. An aircraft checked on my frequency inbound to grr. I advised the pilot of the runway closure; and that the tower was scheduled to open in 10 mins. At this point; someone came on my frequency; identing themselves as grand rapids operations; and stated that the runway would be open in a few mins as they were just about to complete their plowing operation. At this same time the indicator on my erids display was showing that there were new messages to be viewed. Investigating this; one of the messages I retrieved was a NOTAM declaring the original NOTAM closing the runways at grr was canceled. There are many issues to be addressed with this totally unacceptable; unsafe incident. Why do I get a NOTAM that shows my runway open when there are still vehicles on the runway? Are we to totally depend on a plow driver to be listening to the approach control frequency and hope that if they are; that they are able to broadcast to the center controller advising that they are still on the runway? Why are the plow drivers allowed out on the runways after the time declaring the runway closure has passed? Am I to assume that I am in fact communicating with a plow driver at grr; since we have never been officially briefed that this would be a procedure that we would be using? The controller work force at ZAU has never been trained on how to read NOTAMS in the language that they are presented in. They are filled with abbreviations that are foreign to anyone that has not spent any time working in an FSS. We are inundated with these NOTAMS. At the time of this incident. There were 26 other NOTAMS on my erids screen just for the grr airport. Until recently; when the affected airport's tower was closed; the omic would hand carry to the controller all information regarding runway closures. Without any briefing to this critical change in procedures; runway closure information now comes to us in the form a NOTAM that is difficult to read due to the lack of training mentioned in the previous bullet and can potentially be buried amongst a multitude of other NOTAMS; that while important to the pilot; really mean nothing to the controller working that airport.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAU CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING GRR ARPT PROC ALLOWING SNOW REMOVAL EQUIP TO REMAIN ON RWY AFTER NOTAM DECLARED OTHERWISE.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING THE SPARTA SECTOR; NE AREA OF ZAU. THE GRAND RAPIDS APCH CTL AND TWR CLOSE AT MIDNIGHT. ZAU HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS ARPT. A NOTAM WAS ISSUED AT SOME POINT DURING THE NIGHT THAT ANNOUNCED THAT BOTH RWYS 8R/26L AND 35/17 WERE CLOSED. THIS I ASSUME IS FOR SNOW REMOVAL; BUT THE NOTAM DOES NOT SPECIFY THE REASON FOR THE CLOSURE. AN ACFT CHKED ON MY FREQ INBOUND TO GRR. I ADVISED THE PLT OF THE RWY CLOSURE; AND THAT THE TWR WAS SCHEDULED TO OPEN IN 10 MINS. AT THIS POINT; SOMEONE CAME ON MY FREQ; IDENTING THEMSELVES AS GRAND RAPIDS OPS; AND STATED THAT THE RWY WOULD BE OPEN IN A FEW MINS AS THEY WERE JUST ABOUT TO COMPLETE THEIR PLOWING OP. AT THIS SAME TIME THE INDICATOR ON MY ERIDS DISPLAY WAS SHOWING THAT THERE WERE NEW MESSAGES TO BE VIEWED. INVESTIGATING THIS; ONE OF THE MESSAGES I RETRIEVED WAS A NOTAM DECLARING THE ORIGINAL NOTAM CLOSING THE RWYS AT GRR WAS CANCELED. THERE ARE MANY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED WITH THIS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE; UNSAFE INCIDENT. WHY DO I GET A NOTAM THAT SHOWS MY RWY OPEN WHEN THERE ARE STILL VEHICLES ON THE RWY? ARE WE TO TOTALLY DEPEND ON A PLOW DRIVER TO BE LISTENING TO THE APCH CTL FREQ AND HOPE THAT IF THEY ARE; THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO BROADCAST TO THE CTR CTLR ADVISING THAT THEY ARE STILL ON THE RWY? WHY ARE THE PLOW DRIVERS ALLOWED OUT ON THE RWYS AFTER THE TIME DECLARING THE RWY CLOSURE HAS PASSED? AM I TO ASSUME THAT I AM IN FACT COMMUNICATING WITH A PLOW DRIVER AT GRR; SINCE WE HAVE NEVER BEEN OFFICIALLY BRIEFED THAT THIS WOULD BE A PROC THAT WE WOULD BE USING? THE CTLR WORK FORCE AT ZAU HAS NEVER BEEN TRAINED ON HOW TO READ NOTAMS IN THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY ARE PRESENTED IN. THEY ARE FILLED WITH ABBREVIATIONS THAT ARE FOREIGN TO ANYONE THAT HAS NOT SPENT ANY TIME WORKING IN AN FSS. WE ARE INUNDATED WITH THESE NOTAMS. AT THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT. THERE WERE 26 OTHER NOTAMS ON MY ERIDS SCREEN JUST FOR THE GRR ARPT. UNTIL RECENTLY; WHEN THE AFFECTED ARPT'S TWR WAS CLOSED; THE OMIC WOULD HAND CARRY TO THE CTLR ALL INFO REGARDING RWY CLOSURES. WITHOUT ANY BRIEFING TO THIS CRITICAL CHANGE IN PROCS; RWY CLOSURE INFO NOW COMES TO US IN THE FORM A NOTAM THAT IS DIFFICULT TO READ DUE TO THE LACK OF TRAINING MENTIONED IN THE PREVIOUS BULLET AND CAN POTENTIALLY BE BURIED AMONGST A MULTITUDE OF OTHER NOTAMS; THAT WHILE IMPORTANT TO THE PLT; REALLY MEAN NOTHING TO THE CTLR WORKING THAT ARPT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.